| Subject: | Schema deployment masks errors |
Attempting to deploy a schema masks any errors that may occur whilst
deploying the schema, which makes the viable testing route:
1. Deploy schema
2. Poke at the database to see if that succeeded.
This isn't optimal and is a known issue.
From #dbic-class:
21:27 < idn> So is there a good way to work out if $schema->deploy has
succeeded as it doesn't seem to have a return value defined?
21:32 < idn> The source for DBIx::Class::Schema has no return in the
deploy function
21:32 <@mst> um
21:32 <@mst> it delegates to ->storage->deploy
21:32 <@mst> trouble is ... we don't really have a "has succeeded" measure
21:32 <@mst> since deploy tends to warn-and-skip on errors
21:33 <@mst> due to many databases not having a CREATE table IF EXISTS
type mech
21:37 < idn> Though I would have thought returning the value returned by
->storage->deploy was probably the right thing, and then those that can
work it out can pass it back
21:40 < shadowpaste> "ribasushi" at 217.168.150.38 pasted "backlog for
idn about very same issue" (3 lines) at http://paste.scsys.co.uk/122454
Contents of shadow paste:
[03:03:47] <riba> dukeleto: the folks that wrote deploy()s initial
implementation decided to work around sqlt deficiencies by simply
ignoring any deploy-time errors, converting them to warnings
[03:04:11] <riba> dukeleto: 4 years later the default of "mask errors
away" is there to stay
[03:04:28] <riba> dukeleto: however I'd be delighted by a patch that
adds an on_error handler or somesuch to deploy()
Further notes from ribasushi:
21:45 <riba> what I meant is have deploy recognize an extra option that
takes a coderef that gets passed any DBI exception
21:45 <riba> and it is up to the coderef to propagate said exception or
to mask it away
21:45 <riba> in abscence of such handler - deploy falls back to its
default of masking everything away
21:47 <riba> the actual eval lives in ::Storage::DBI::deploy
21:47 <riba> (not Schema::deploy)
There's the notes and the details of the bug.
I'll try and have a look at this but I suspect it might well be beyond me!
Thanks guys, Ian.